Re: USAGE: More Japanese
| From: | Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Sunday, July 6, 2003, 0:45 |
|---|
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 03:41:23PM -0700, Garth Wallace wrote:
> Maybe it's just the recording? Sometimes phonemes are harder to identify
> when sung.
Yeah, that's what I figure, but if there's an /m/ hiding in there it's
hiding really darn well. :)
>These are the ones I know about; am I missing any?
>
> >1. /hu/ is pronounced [fu]
>
> Actually, [p\u].
Thanks.
> >2. /si/ is pronounced [Si] (/sj/ is [S])
>
> I'd say there is no /si/, just /sa/ /su/ /se/ /so/ and /Sa/ /Si/ /Su/
> /So/. At least in native words. Maybe you could say the /s/-/S/
> distinction is neutralized before /i/.
Well, that's what I meant. I think of it as a single phoneme
/s/, possibly palatalized before /a/,/o/, or /u/, and followed by
any of the five vowels, with these phonetic realizations:
/sa/ [sa]
/sja/ [Sa]
/se/ [se]
/si/ [Si]
/so/ [so]
/sjo/ [So]
/su/ [su]
/sju/ [Su]
Similarly for /ti/ -> [tSi], /tja/ -> [tSa], etc.
-Mark
Reply